Defining Awesome
  • Status Updates

  • Written by . Posted at 4:46 am on March 15th, 2010

    Prediction about video games in the future: the core gameplay concepts invented over 20 years ago will be exactly the same in a 100 years because technology can grow and graphics will be better but the human mind will be always the same and its capacity is constant. It can only take as much as it takes now.

    Be Sociable, Share!


    1. What exactly do you mean by “core gameplay concepts”?

      Look at the indie gaming community, you’ll see that the ideas are still out there… we just need to “have” them

    2. Yes and no. Back in ye olde days, games like pong or tetris were simple because making a more complex game was hard or impossible to accomplish using that hardware. For a time games scaled with the hardware, meaning games gained features that utilized the hardware. Meaning – actual features used up the CPU, not the presentation. Take Capitalism – a very intricate and complex game. Or system shock 2 – bioshock doesn’t live up to it’s complexity. Jagged Alliance 2, Planescape Torment.. It’s the time when 3d accelerators started to appear that game development started changing.

      A few years form that time we can see that games are getting simpler. Stupider. Has there ever been a worthy successor to Jagged Alliance 2? Sure, there have been clones, but none of them had the depth and strategic/tactical complexity. And the only notable example of a modern game to use destructible environments is BC2. Or how about UFO: Enemy Unknown? There have been various attempts, but all of them failed. Go and compare System Shock 2, Bioshock and Bioshock 2. In terms of complexity, difficulty and depth it goes from great in SS2 to horrible in Bioshock2. Or take Deus Ex and Deus Ex 2. The second was oversimplified and retard-proof crud. Universal ammo, so that the console kiddies don’t have to make choices. How convenient.

      The basic idea is that game complexity is proportional to the target intellect. A smart player can play a game made for retards, even if he won’t enjoy it as much as that 12-year old with an xbawks. A stupid player on the other hand won’t enjoy a “smart” game, like Pathologic. So game companies are releasing shit even a retard could play, keeping mechanics as simple as possible to ensure a low barrier of entry.

      The human mind won’t change fast, so we won’t see games based on, say, completely different mechanics. We will see the same formula but with additional things, such as breakable walls, better physics and other “transparent” gameplay mechanics.

      But while the mechanics at their core won’t be different, I hope a few more companies will start catering to the “hardcore” gamer, like EvE.

    3. nice comment, i second that, and strongly advice Michal to think out of the box after releasing the alpha/beta version of LD, the hacking system you have been inventing should be complicated, but the retard-section should be like this :

      you have 2 choices,

      1 The AI hacks, you dont have to do the puzzle’s/hacking, the AI will do it, but it takes more time then when u :

      2 Hack yourself, complex puzzles/mindfucking to give the smarter player a hard and fun time.

      Combat! :

      1 Command your squad in battle and control one of em to join thefight.

      2 Command every movement of every soldier and micro their exact use of items and movement for precision attack, this is yet again for the smarter/hardcore gamer, he will not have enough time to retardingly go rambo with one of his soldiers.

      Smart VS Retard is a big decision in LD MM, you should really think about what to and what not to, i prefer a system i just suggested( also since you are going to need the donations from the players to stay alive and eat ): A smart section and a retard/casual section.

      You can make the game as indepth as you want, but less people will be interested, make it as retardish as the guy above me said, and people will call it a clone, flame it and download it for free( well, atleast you got players? ).

      Having more people understand the human mind, especially MM himself, should make him more confident in extending todays simple/stock gameplay. Extend the limits, and this game, and your own state of mind, will be fucking pleased.

      I had a few beers, so dont mind me.

    4. yea, its still all about to motivate and entertain the player. You don’t even need a computer to play a good game.

      @archont: System Shock 2 is the best game ever 😉

    5. Makron666

      This is why I love indie games, because the retarts are too dumb to find them. We really require a games revolution, where smart complex games are made by real DEVs, that don’t strive for money, unlike EA or some bullshit company. Id go beserk if I just played mainstream games, like MW2, so im extremely happy indie devs do exist, who dont make games as a job, but rather a hobby. Look at Dwarf Fortress, the dev toady owns the most complex game on earth, but it is still easy to play. He makes games for a hobby, but he gets donations $5k/month, which makes the process much more rewarding.

    6. Michal is obiviously hoping that in 100 years,
      video games will still be legal to play.

    7. Iill make new and fruity games.

      Look at DICE, mirrors edge was totally new and awesome, sane (to a degree) with assassins creed.

      We’ll get fresher games.

      At least until infinity ward takes over the universe.

    8. “core gameplay concepts” = run & jump, kill enemies, collect points, avoid obstacles etc…

      archont: The human mind won’t change fast, so we won’t see games based on, say, completely different mechanics.
      Yes that’s my point. And you are right that the commercial games are actually going backwards.

      TLD: I’d very much like to have a complex part in the game like super-micro-managment of bot tactics and inventory cause in the long-term it would keep players like me who like that sort of stuff. But on the other hand players can’t be forced to do that sort of stuff if they just want to join and have a quick fight.

      FinDude: haha awesome :). If they are illegal then I’ll become rich like a narcotics king.

      Gnoblar: mirrors edge was totally new and awesome, sane (to a degree) with assassins creed.
      Prince of Persia 1989?

    9. Michal, dont forget that super-micro-management is achievable just by adding que-ed( how do you spell that ??? ) commands.

      Dont forget that you will have advanced players and rambo’s, i picked my words carefully and said : “1 Command your squad in battle and control one of em to join thefight.” With which i ment : You control one of the soldiers.

      An even more interesting part would be multiple squads in the same team. like, 4 vs 4 players? with each a squad of 5 to 50 men. player one could be like a sniper team, with 2 scouts and 1 medic, 1 engineer and 1 machine gunner ? and player too would go massive idiotic grunts, like, 30 bots ? and just command them.

      Those things should make an 2d sidescrolling RTS interesting.

      You still get your guys to do what you want em to do, and you can decide by yourself how many men you would pick etcetc, but this also adds an dimension of teamwork.

      team-based matches of clans with players specialized in different roles, like the hacking system i spoke off;

      plyr #1 would have insane hacking skills, having a squad of 5 engineers/hackers to build sentries and hack doors and cameras.

      plyr #2 would go spec-ops, stealth suiting his men and directing snipers and support

      plyr #3 would go grunting, lots of infantry.

      plyr #4 would go mech’s & vehicles.

      This is the full-scale-war RTS you were talking about at the very beginning of this blog. The only different thing is, you wanted to let 1 player control every aspect of it.

      ( dont forget i had beer mkay ? )

    10. EDIT : massive thumbs-up on recent days 4-player coop games, seems to be the magic number ?

    11. Oh snap prince of Persia!

      But mirrors edge was really quite different.

    12. Further to TLD’s argument you could easily adapt the ‘squad’ system from Bad Company 2, perhaps offering rewards or synergies for players who co-ordinate tactically with their team-mates – such as an improved ‘kill-assist’ bonus, or various ‘party buffs’.

    13. Как сказал бы один известный писатель: В этом что-то есть.

    14. Have you had problems with spammers? I also use Blog Engine and I have some good anti-spam techniques; please Email me if you are interested in an exchange of ideas. Don’t let your emotions overtake you – take a few seconds and start counting slowly until you feel you can react as calmly as possible.

    Post a comment.